MotorcycleDaily.com – Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Honda Europe Teases New Africa Twin-Powered Sport Tourer for October 21 Reveal

Rumored for some time, it appears Honda is about to reveal a production sport tourer powered by the same 1,084cc parallel twin engine found in the Africa Twin. Reportedly, emissions data already published in Germany indicates there will be two models, designated NT1100A and NT1100D, likely representing a traditional manual transmission model as well as a DCT version. That same German report indicates the engine is in the same mild state of tune as the Africa Twin … barely making more than 100 horsepower.

We are displaying several screenshots from the promotional video (which is at the bottom of this article). Notably, you can see that a clutch lever is missing from the top photo, indicating a DCT transmission.

The video also reveals generous passenger accommodations, including a backrest integrated into a rear top box. The stepped seat places the passenger significantly higher than the rider. You can also see a dual-screen instrument display in one of the profile screen-grabs.

Remember, this is Honda Europe promoting the October 21 reveal event, not Honda U.S. Nevertheless, we expect this model will be made available in the U.S., with announcement for the U.S. market occurring a bit later. Stay tuned.

80 Comments

  1. newtonmetres says:

    When is a manufacturer going to put an enclosed chain on a sports-tourer or any model?
    Recall the YAMAHA XV1000 V-twin 1981? I had one. Enclosure was hard plastic and didnt look
    weird-there was no internal lubricating-bath. Had an easy on-off section so you could check and adjust the chain. Must be a sizable benefit keeping chain out of the elements and road dust and grit. Whole part would not have weighed more than 1.5 KG

  2. Donk says:

    As one who’s gone from a 1290 Super Adventure to a R1200RT (for 3 months) to an 890 Adventure I can tell you that sometimes less is more. I’m loving the parallel twin in the 890, bike can rip into triple digits speed, bang out 800 mile days in comfort, and its light weight make it both a blast in the corners and less fatiguing. If the Honda is anything close it should be a winner. Parallel twins are much more efficient to manufacture and offer better eight centralization.

    • mickey says:

      the 890 adv is listed at 105 hp and 74 lb torque so in that respect it should be real close to the NT’s performance figures only the NT will weigh more. Not enough to make it not fun to ride though.

    • Gary says:

      I own a 1200RT and it is by far the best bike I’ve ever owned. You’d have to shoot me to get me off of it.

  3. Jeremy says:

    I think the automatic tranny is probably the game changer here. I know and have met many first-time riders that have an Africa Twin or an NC solely because automatics were available on those bikes. I also know several very accomplished riders that ride those same bikes and wouldn’t go back to a manual for commuting duty, and a couple even for off-road duty.

  4. foster says:

    Honda’s best sport TOURERS, note the emphasis, were the ST1100 and its follow up the ST1300. Without the full fairing protection those bikes had, or the trouble free shaft drive, Honda will not achieve what it had all those years ago in the sport TOUR category. That’s why I still have my trusty ST1100.

  5. RyYYZ says:

    To me “Sport-touring” means a bike I can tour on – riding all day for multiple days back to back – and enjoy riding in a sporty way when I encounter good roads. There’s a spectrum, of course – if you’re tough maybe you can tour on an R1. If you’re like me you want something like a BMW RT.

    As such I’m more interested in its touring amenities than its power. Is that an electrically adjustable windshield I see there? Is a centrestand available (comes in handy for lubing that chain). Heated grips and cruise control standard? Easily adjustable rear preload? Comfy seat? Good headlights? I know that sounds awfully practical-minded, but these things really matter when you’re living with a bike day in day out for a week or more on the road.

    I’ve owned multiple bikes with 100ish HP, mostly 1000+ cc, and for the most part I’ve rarely thought “I could really use more power”. All (including the 600+ lb RT I have now) have had more than enough power for brisk passing, even two-up, and will quickly blast to and way past any local speed limits into “you lose your bike and license for a month on the roadside” to “you’re getting arrested” speed.

    • todd says:

      I just did a couple Kawasaki demo rides today; Versys 1000, and reacquainted myself with the KLR650. Truth be told, both were equally capable of running along the highway in comfort at extra-legal speeds. I did like the Versys better than the recent R1200RT I borrowed for a week, much smoother and roomier. However, I was quite surprised how capable and fun the KLR was. It was really roomy, smooth and comfortable and had a bit more refinement and poke than I remember. If money were no object, I’d pick the KLR out if all three bikes to do long journeys on.

  6. Mick says:

    Interesting to see all the power junkies chime in. What’s odd about that is comparing a four cylinder to a twin. Take the two down a deeply twisted road and see which one comes out of the technical corners harder. Most people don’t carry a ton of rpm through their zillionth tight corner.

    For me it’s about how much power the bike has when you roll on the gas and how much weight that power has to accelerate. How much power a bike makes in a rev range that I don’t use is irrelevant to me. And weight always matters, always.

    It saddens me that all the manufacturers are responding to Euro 5 with displacement increases alone at a time when 500 is the new 400 pounds. That’s lazy engineering in my book.

  7. Michael says:

    I’ll tell ya, I have a 20 Africa Twin manual (had a 17 dct) and this new motor is a jewel, I’ve had over 100 motorcycles, I’m not an expert but I’m just sayin, the motor is very, very good. BTW, it might have lower gearing stock than this tourer they’re teasing us with but my bike will easily wheelie without the clutch in first gear, probably 2nd too so the power is more than sufficient for my needs. If my AT had a 19″ factory front wheel, I would be even happier with it.

    • Dirck Edge says:

      I really liked the new AT motor, as well. Nice character and the low-end torque is such a big step up from the original AT. Peak horsepower isn’t huge, of course, but for most riders I think the power is more than adequate. If you want to chase sport bikes at a track day, the new Suzuki would be a better choice.

  8. Having owned a fabulous 2000 VFR 800 among 20 odd BMW’s plus a Triumph 1050 Sprint ST, I’d say Honda has really lost it in the Sport-Touring category since the 800cc VFR’s. I’ll never understand the 1200 cc VFR as a replacement for the fabulous 750-800cc VFR’s; the 1200 is/was a good bike for sure but NOT what the typical VFR lover wanted as a follow-up…all every VFR lover ever wanted was maybe a 900cc VFR with a modest increase in HP and low and mid-range torque (I could even live without gear-driven cams, one of the best sounds in all motorcycling). 270 degree crank parallel twins at around 100 HP/65-70 ft.lbs.torque make a worthy and good-sounding motor for most any sport-touring application (go ride the BMW 750 GS or Triumph’s parallel twin offerings). Let’s hope Big Red gets it right this time…happy to see the sport-touring segment on the rebound..

  9. Reginald Van Blunt says:

    ‘ The New Touring Era. ‘ OK – let me get this right. Wheeless hover craft, invisible to police, laser air in front blasters, hydrophobic tail trunk garden for snacking, clutchless and auto throttle, with advanced navigation display, and beverage holders.
    Facial tissue holder optional. Alright !

  10. Grover says:

    Going to be hard not to compare this bike to Suzuki’s new offering, the GSX-S1000GT. For the nearly the same money you’ll get a performance sport touring bike that will blow away this Honda in every respect. Not a big fan of the NX750X styling, so another 350cc’s ain’t gonna impress me no matter how many electronic gizmos it comes equipped with. I’m non-denominational when it comes to motorcycles, but I am casually looking for my next bike, and yes, HP does matter!

    • Max says:

      If you learn how to ride, you’ll be able to have more fun than just pulling the throttle. All that power won’t help you when the road starts bending.
      The Suzi is okay, but the pegs are too high and no option for a top box and questionable passenger comfort. Fine for a younger solo rider to take a trip.

      • TF says:

        And all of your sweet cornering skills won’t help you when you are on the interstate in the middle of Kansas. With a modern bike you can have 150 HP in that environment but switch modes when you reach a road or conditions where less HP is an advantage or makes riding safer.

        • todd says:

          It only takes about 20-25hp to move a motorcycle down the highway at 75mph. I hope you don’t suggest shooting for 150+mph on your trip through Kansas! Is there a rider mode that removes 200 pounds off your bike?

          • TF says:

            It’s obviously about the ability to accelerate quickly from a given speed. How much space will you need to pass a truck moving at 70mph when you are riding a 25 HP motorcycle? How about a 50 HP motorcycle with a passenger on the back? A 75 HP motorcycle may be adequate but why would I handicap myself when there are countless other choices that perform better?

            BTW, my 150 HP adventure bike weighs about 500 pounds. The only “street bike” that I can think of that weighs 300 pounds anymore is a small dual sport or supermoto bike. For 95% of the street riding I do, I want the 500 pound bike.

          • mickey says:

            Sure but it takes more than 20-25 hp to accelerate 550 pounds of machine plus 350 pounds of riders plus 50 pounds of gear from a dead stop to 70 or 80 mph getting on a freeway or passing a motorhome on a mountain pass or accelerating out of a corner with any urgency when riding for fun.

            I hope you are not suggesting 25 horsepower is enough for going up Beartooth Pass in Montana two up with luggage.

          • TF says:

            I have passed slow rolling tourists on 212 while two up and fully loaded. I’ll say it again, 100+ horsepower is a safety feature.

          • todd says:

            I don’t know why your bikes are all so slow. Years ago, I went on a camping trip with my wife on my GB500. We were two up with all camping gear and doing 100 mph to pass a long line of cars, up a hill. Sure, it took a little longer than it normally took to get to that speed (or more) but the GB500 has 33hp and performed just fine. My K75S does just fine too all loaded up with two people, though we do bottom the rear shock on occasion! I’ve burned through two 200 mile tanks at 90+ two up and full luggage, no problem. The K75 dyno’d at 56hp at the rear wheel. Sure, more power is exciting and I admit getting to 60mph+ in 3 seconds is a bit of a rush on my Duke but 150HP is guaranteed never reached on a touring bike, two up with luggage, over a mountain highway passing a line of RVs.

          • mickey says:

            todd the GB 500 was listed as having a top speed of 103 or 108 depending on the source. That was probably with a solo rider on flat ground. If you were running 100 2 up going up hill passing, you had nothing in reserve for an emergency situation. I don’t like to run my bikes that close to the edge. Having extra power is a safety measure and you don’t have to use it if you don’t need it but it’s nice to know it’s there if you do need it,

            We can argue here all day on how much horsepower is really needed by someone, but in the end, for some of us, have more than enough is a lot more comforting than not having enough.

          • todd says:

            I get it Mickey. My point was that even the GB500 at 33hp has more than enough power to do high-speed passes on the highway. High-speed to me is anything over 75 mph, about the speed of everyone else on the road. But, yeah, the faster you ride passing a line of cars, the safer you are…

  11. TP says:

    I think Honda’s onto something and I look forward to seeing this.

  12. Neal says:

    Another website is saying 524 lbs for the base model and 546 lbs for the DCT version.

  13. newtonmetres says:

    Honda has never entered the HP wars except for sports bikes. Soon as I saw this article header I thought HO HUM!! Gonna be mild. Probably put out 80 REAR WHEEL HP and 70-73 TORQUE-sure enough for any sane person but any sane people left out there? I had a FJR1300-a magazine put one on the dyno: put out 130 HP and 90 TORQUE-didnt seem outta-this-world powerful to me considering its weight. For me the MORE POWER THE BETTER!!!!{I would love to see a stripped GOLD WING putting out true 160 HP 120 TORQUE-that would be achievable}

  14. Anonymous says:

    Except for their sport bikes Honda has never entered the HP wars. Soon as i saw this article header knew this model would be MILD. Probably put out 80 REAR WHEEL HP maybe 70-73 TORQUE-sure enough for any sane person but in my book needs 100 HP true. Had a FJR 1300 – some magazine dyno-ed it: put out 130 HP and 90 LB TORQUE-that didnt feel outta-this-world powerful to me considering its weight. The MORE POWER the better!

  15. Rennie says:

    This talk of horsepower reminds me of the folks driving giant 4 wheel drive trucks to the corner for a latte or a beer. Silly. Besides it’s torgue that makes riding fun and 77 ft lbs is enough.

    • Randy D says:

      Perhaps you have never enjoyed riding a ZX14. just rolling on the throttle makes a normal person a laughing fool. If low HP is your thing man, I don’t have an issue, but don’t crap on people who like to have an adrenaline rush when they ride.. That’s like saying an ugly woman is all you need for sex, but, a pretty one makes it so much better.

      • Chris says:

        LOL, but you never look at the mantel piece when you’re pokin’ the fire. +1 on the ZX14r. Riding a rocket!

    • Jeremy says:

      Acceleration is what makes riding fun, not torque. Harley Davidsons have plenty of torque, for example, but they are about as exciting as running an old farm tractor through the gears.

      • Jack says:

        Does the torque not provide the acceleration?? I disagree with where you are going as I find roll on acceleration more important that drag strip type of acceleration.

        • Dirck Edge says:

          I was around, but I guess I wasn’t paying attention.

        • todd says:

          Can you please remove “sorel” from my post, Dirck?

        • Jeremy says:

          Sure the torque is an ingredient, but it isn’t the complete recipe. I’m not sure what the difference is between drag strip vs roll-on acceleration other than one takes place from 0 mph while the other initiates from some arbitrary speed . I’m really just talking about give-it-the-beans acceleration. The only other kind of acceleration I know of is lateral.

          I don’t want a torque vs horsepower argument. My opinion is that this engine makes enough torque already. I wouldn’t mind seeing it put out maybe 115 horsepower at the wheel for sport touring duty… So that it would have more enthusiastic acceleration at any speed.

  16. Randy D says:

    The GSX-S1000 GT will eat its lunch and throw the wrapper back in its face.

    • Stuki Moi says:

      Above 7000rpm…….

      While wearing out your clutch hand fighting traffic through Rome with that race bred gearbox….

      • fred says:

        The GSX-S has the Suzuki Clutch Assist System, which lightens the clutch pull. It also has a bi-directional quickshifter, so your argument goes up in smoke.

        As far as performance goes, friends riding together won’t find the bikes incompatible. If friendship devolves into street racing, the Suzuki rider will have an advantage.

        • Stuki Moi says:

          The last GSX-S1000 had a tall 1st gear. I haven’t heard any indication that Suzuki has changed that for the new one. While the clutch pull may not be heavy, it’s pretty constant in big city gridlock. I bet Suzuki engineers and designers don’t much care, since Superbike derived nakeds aren’t proper inner city commuters to begin with. But, misguided or not, people do end up using them as such.

          The Honda, assuming it shares a box with the ATwin, is much more amendable to both hacking through gridlock, and to cruising freeways at a leisurely rpm. And that’s disregarding the DCT option.

          For more performance oriented riding, the GSX-S engine is in an altogether different league, though. It may be the best SPORT touring engine there is. While the ATwin’s mill, is “functional.” Or perhaps “powerful enough.” But hardly viscerally exciting when pushed a bit.

  17. Mick says:

    I warms my heart to see the new parallel twins usher in a new era. Lighter, more compact engines that make good street power. Great!

    I’ll probably die before anything really cool becomes of it. But this is good news for the future folks who will eventually get to benefit from these technologies. I can die fooling myself that maybe some day there will be a decent bike that I can just go out and buy.

  18. Randy says:

    Uh…I remember when 50hp BMW’s travelled the entire planet. And 50 HP Bonnevilles only weighed 365 lbs, which means the weight to HP ratio was excellent. This is no longer a matter of need , it’s WANT, WANT, WANT. Not that there’s a problem with that, but damn, quit acting like 20 extra HP would be nirvana, or lean angles have to be to a specification, or slipper clutches are a necessity.

    • dt-175 says:

      type “troy courser old bmw” into youtube search…

    • Max says:

      They need it to prove to their friends on the internet that they are the bravest. Watch them ride. Most of them probably use more than 25 hp for more than a few seconds if at all.

  19. My2cents says:

    I too wonder how 100 hp minimums became a thing. I had a 80’s GL 1100 with maybe 80 hp and probably 70 ft/lbs which weighed in a something around 750 lbs wet. I toured 2 up loaded with gear for two and camping gear and never thought it was lacking power. I have also owned sport bikes with loads of power that couldn’t ever provide the capacity and comfort to equal that GL. Honda builds high quality, well sorted machines and this will be in that league. Looking forward to seeing the end product.

    • TF says:

      Traffic moved nearly 30 mph slower in the 1980’s than it does today. If you’ve ridden cross country, two up and fully loaded, in recent times you would see 100+ horsepower as a safety feature. In the 1980’s you could drive your 120 horsepower Chevy sedan cross-country with no trouble. Wanna try that today when the traffic across Utah flows at about 90 mph?

      • Reddl@gmail.com says:

        Speed limit SIGNS were 30 mph lower. Actual traffic moved about the same

        I still have and ride a mid 80s GL1200 and it keeps up w fast highway traffic in 2021 with zero problem.

        • TF says:

          False, at least in my part of the world. And speed limits were enforced back then. Cruising at 65mph on an interstate highway would get you pulled over back in 1980.

          To each his own. Enjoy your vintage bike if that’s what turns you on.

          • fred says:

            In the 80’s (actually from 74-95), the NSL was 55mph. Now, most states are 70-75 max, with quite a few @ 80, and some places in TX @ 85mph. Enforcement varies.

            My ’79 CB750 spent a lot of time in the 90-110mph range. My ’82 CBX cruised comfortably @ 110mph from full to empty. My ’82 GL1100 (currently parked) was quite happy @ 85-95mph.

            Many vintage bikes have no problems keeping pace with “fast” “modern” traffic. Brakes weren’t always great in the 70’s and 80’s, but the engines were fine.

            My 90’s sport bikes will happily run at whatever speed I’m brave or crazy enough to ride them at.

            It sounds like you meant “vintage bike” as a slur, but it isn’t one. Bikes have been quite competent for a long time now. Most of the “modern” improvements are nice, but really aren’t needed to have a great time riding.

          • TF says:

            Thanks for the history lesson. Unfortunately, I am old enough to have driven/ridden through all those dark years as well. There’s no question that an older bike can be ridden cross country. But, a modern bike will do it better with less effort, more comfortably, and safer.

    • Jeremy says:

      “I too wonder how 100 hp minimums became a thing.”

      Because good things have staying power. That’s like asking how pizza or air conditioning ever “became a thing.”

  20. mickey says:

    I for one am looking forward to a test sit and a test ride if I’m tall enough. 100 horses and 77 pounds of torque are very satisfying riding numbers for me.

  21. mike d says:

    The new Suzuki GSX-S1000 GT is an inline 4, probably lighter, and with 140+ hp.
    I don’t see how this can compete, other than some people are brand fans.

    • Randy D says:

      Exactly!!!!!

    • Tim says:

      Or riders who simply prefer the power characteristics of a twin to those of an inline 4.

    • Dave says:

      There are many riders who do not shop solely based on peak horsepower.

    • mickey says:

      or for someone interested in a moderately powerful sport tourer with a DCT transmission

    • paquo says:

      i bet this one has slightly more upright ergos and better wind protection

    • fred says:

      I doubt that either the NC1100 or the GSX-S1000GT are really targeted at the squid demographic. Either bike, running 50-75% throttle, and shifting at 50-75% of redline, is easily going to outrun traffic and reach and exceed legal speeds quite quickly. Even relatively slow liter bikes are quite quick. There’s a practical limit to how much power you can use on the street before you have to deal regularly with law enforcement or medical personnel.

  22. SVGeezer says:

    Nice if Honda would show an image of the ****! Bike!

    They’re from Japan. Someone should remember the Infinity ads. Pretty certain all the Geezers do, even if they don’t have an SV.

    • Neal says:

      That concept render looks awesome, but the video makes it look like it’s closer to an old Deauville. Pretty sure it will be about the same price and about the same weight as the V100. If so, I’d take the Guzzi for the design, the Vtwin and the shaft drive.

  23. Gham says:

    oh great, a Honda “Africa” Deauville, just when everyone wants a Transalp. I love Honda’s but I’m only gonna wait so long for you guys to build a T7 beater or I’m going Yamaha.

  24. JC says:

    First, I’m confident it will be a good motorcycle and that many people will like it.

    But…….and this is just me……the motor is a bit anemic for me. 100hp and 80lb/ft of torque leaves me feeling like I want more. I’ve ridden the Rebel 1100 for a test ride and an extended weekend on an Africa Twin. Both have their place in today’s landscape. The Rebel is a full size bike that novice riders can use, then continue riding it for a long time after becoming experienced. The AT is an excellent adventure bike for people who actually use it for off road purposes.
    A sport touring bike on the other hand needs mo power bebe! Particularly for two-up riding.

    • Tom R says:

      Oh my, when I began riding the MOST powerful street bikes had about…100 HP. How did we ever manage?

      • randy says:

        Uh…I remember when 50hp BMW’s travelled the entire planet. And 50 HP Bonnevilles only weighed 365 lbs, which means the weight to HP ratio was excellent. This is no longer a matter of need , it’s WANT, WANT, WANT. Not that there’s a problem with that, but damn, quit acting like 20 extra HP would be nirvana, or lean angles have to be tolerable, or slipper clutches are a necessity.

        • TF says:

          And I remember when most cars had only an AM radio (if they had one at all) and no rear view mirror on the RH side. I don’t want to live in that world anymore. I am sure that at some time, many years ago, someone said “why do I need a starter motor, I am perfectly capable of turning a crank”!

          As I have said before, we don’t NEED motorcycles. Those that get developed and manufactured are those that people WANT. It will be interesting to see if this Honda continues to be built.

          As a young man I had a 20 HP dirt bike and I had a great time riding it. Forty years later I ride a 40 HP dirt bike. Which one is more fun? I’ll take 40 HP, electric start, and a Rekluse clutch EVERY TIME the question is asked. I also have a 150 HP adventure bike. Do I “scare myself silly” with either one? Nope. I just use them for their intended purpose and enjoy them.

          • JC says:

            I don’t get the scared silly comment either. I like the tech and power that comes with modern bikes. Now, if this Honda sports touring bike weighs in at ~ 400 lbs, I’d be more interested.
            Again, I think it will be a good bike. I just Think it needs more hp and definitely more torque.

        • JC says:

          You guys aren’t wrong. My first big bike was a Norton Commando and it was only a couple years after it was the fastest bike available. It might have had 70hp.

          It doesn’t change the fact that modern liter+ bikes are expected to have more power than this motor. It’s a good motor, and the bike will likely be a solid typical Honda product, but buyers will listen to journalists and YouTubers. These people will discount points for lack of power, particularly when 900cc competitors from Yamaha, KTM, Ducati and Triumph offer more.

      • fred says:

        Same here. We managed fine and had a great time. I feel sorry for people who can’t or don’t enjoy motorcycling unless they are scaring themselves silly.

    • newtonmetres says:

      Agree 100%